From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Wed, 15 May 2024 17:24:58 +0200 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by lore.white.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1s7GV0-00Fy0A-17 for lore@lore.pengutronix.de; Wed, 15 May 2024 17:24:58 +0200 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([2607:7c80:54:3::133]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1s7GUz-0001rd-Nq for lore@pengutronix.de; Wed, 15 May 2024 17:24:58 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: MIME-Version:Message-Id:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To:Content-Type: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Owner; bh=LRlmoysioy4stMrhFpFoXGYru7tPQq27U6h4UGC8p4c=; b=rWrTl9FNHB4nukNZONgnUE9QCI 6iL0VpFjhdMWC6xbyAlBLZOhSb/kDnApH1HtPw2yF0YVnQNgHD41AA1/meGkouwf93YCStku1EHCD H7CYbgtCGRi1nqNF/YUfES2VQ5lEEQ08+ofuTK45LD3cqgGUe0zcyvxgwPiM29LQoLfwZMbQ7LAVl jcW6LANEEWt5U8CAW7W37onybC/UZmk/V+slGxjHRlKEFN802intaSdZXEwQYzcEmN4BbqO5+adLK pjH72wJCfFVbSpwD8vVMmVyLMKSCKIkZxKBxKY6M7ltwIZok98IX6GkjlT5HRrY25I6ftB1/iSTl7 MTRHIZ8A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1s7GUN-00000001wuI-16Lf; Wed, 15 May 2024 15:24:19 +0000 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1s7GUK-00000001wtb-2LLO for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 15 May 2024 15:24:17 +0000 Received: from drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1s7GUI-0001YB-K7; Wed, 15 May 2024 17:24:14 +0200 Received: from [2a0a:edc0:0:1101:1d::54] (helo=dude05.red.stw.pengutronix.de) by drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1s7GUI-001Ycg-7M; Wed, 15 May 2024 17:24:14 +0200 Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=dude05.red.stw.pengutronix.de) by dude05.red.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1s7GUI-00ECuz-0S; Wed, 15 May 2024 17:24:14 +0200 From: Ahmad Fatoum To: barebox@lists.infradead.org Cc: Ahmad Fatoum Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 17:24:10 +0200 Message-Id: <20240515152410.3386237-1-a.fatoum@pengutronix.de> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240515_082416_623531_C7522339 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.16 ) X-BeenThere: barebox@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "barebox" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2607:7c80:54:3::133 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: barebox-bounces+lore=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Subject: [PATCH] fs: ramfs: allocate once instead of twice per ramfs chunk X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 08 May 2019 21:11:16 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de) There's no reason to maintain two allocations per chunk, so just collect them both into the same calloc call. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum --- I didn't test thoroughly what performance improvement this might bring, but it looks like a sensible thing to do. --- fs/ramfs.c | 14 ++++---------- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ramfs.c b/fs/ramfs.c index 117e69b70c0c..3223beba7212 100644 --- a/fs/ramfs.c +++ b/fs/ramfs.c @@ -28,10 +28,10 @@ #define CHUNK_SIZE (4096 * 2) struct ramfs_chunk { - char *data; unsigned long ofs; int size; struct list_head list; + char data[]; }; struct ramfs_inode { @@ -98,19 +98,14 @@ static struct inode *ramfs_get_inode(struct super_block *sb, const struct inode static struct ramfs_chunk *ramfs_get_chunk(unsigned long size) { - struct ramfs_chunk *data = malloc(sizeof(struct ramfs_chunk)); - - if (!data) - return NULL; + struct ramfs_chunk *data; if (size < MIN_SIZE) size = MIN_SIZE; - data->data = calloc(size, 1); - if (!data->data) { - free(data); + data = calloc(struct_size(data, data, size), 1); + if (!data) return NULL; - } data->size = size; @@ -119,7 +114,6 @@ static struct ramfs_chunk *ramfs_get_chunk(unsigned long size) static void ramfs_put_chunk(struct ramfs_chunk *data) { - free(data->data); free(data); } -- 2.39.2